Kevin Anderson

@article{09dd73bebde244d289b9202f38aedad0,

title = {Implications of large hydro dams for decarbonising Ghana’s energy consistent with Paris climate objectives},

author = {Jaise Kuriakose and Kevin Anderson and Deborah Darkod and Emmanuel Obuobie and Alice Larkin and Salifu Addo},

doi = {10.1016/j.esd.2022.10.011},

issn = {0973-0826},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-11-03},

journal = {Energy for Sustainable Development},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {Hydropower is a renewable source of electricity generation that is a common feature of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), especially in developing countries. However, far from benign, research shows that significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions emanate from shallow reservoirs when they are sited in the tropics. Ghana provides a case study for exploring the implications of hydro reservoir emissions within a future energy system consistent with the Paris climate objectives. Being a fast-developing country, Ghana needs to generate significant amounts of low carbon electricity to meet growing demand over the coming 30 years. Analysis of existing Ghanaian dams (Akosombo, Kpong and Bui) and the forthcoming Pwalugu dam suggests that their average emissions intensities (gCO2/kWh) are similar to those of coal-fired power stations during the first 30 years of their operating lifetime. The case study demonstrates that cumulative (post-2020) carbon dioxide emissions from the planned and identified hydro resources will consume 40% of Ghana’s Paris-compliant carbon budget, yet provide just under 1% of its future energy demand (under Paris-compliant scenarios). The analysis suggests that new hydropower in the tropics can significantly reduce the emission space available for other sectors such as transport and industry when faced with a highly restricted emissions budget. In conclusion, for Ghana specifically, rather than construct more dams, energy efficiency and diversifying renewable energy supply options, including floating solar power, would deliver an energy transition for Ghana that is much more closely aligned with the Paris goals.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{a671d80d2f284e7a9213d8759446fc0a,

title = {What does the Paris Climate Change Agreement mean for local policy? Downscaling the remaining global carbon budget to sub-national areas.},

author = {Jaise Kuriakose and Christopher Jones and Kevin Anderson and Carly McLachlan and John Broderick},

doi = {10.1016/j.rset.2022.100030},

issn = {2667-095X},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-08-01},

journal = {Renewable and Sustainable Energy Transition},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {Following high profile United Nations climate summits in Glasgow and Paris, sub-national regions and cities are increasingly seeking to set climate targets and policies in line with the Paris Agreement’s goals. Downscaled carbon budgets are a useful framework for setting local mitigation targets related to a specific global temperature change. However, doing so presents a range of methodological issues, including: choices on the appropriate goals to set, the scope of emissions and sectors, the allocation approaches to apply, whether offset credits and/or carbon dioxide removals are acceptable and, if so, to what extent. This paper details a novel and transparent methodology for downscaling a Paris-aligned global carbon budget to sub-national areas, focusing on emissions from energy (power, heat, cooling, surface transport and industry). The effects of different global carbon budgets, various net zero targets and allocation methods on the size of sub-national budgets and associated mitigation rates are explored. The resulting budgets and annual emission reduction rates vary significantly, reflecting the implications of both high-level methodological choices and local factors, including economic activity, energy-system structure and population. Recent historical emissions (grandfathering) are found to be more appropriate for allocating national carbon budgets to sub-national areas than capability or egalitarian allocations. In the UK case study presented, adopting a grandfathering approach, the annual mitigation rates range from 7% to 16% between different sub-national areas. The analysis concludes that establishing agreed sub-national allocation approaches and boundaries are key to developing coherent national strategies consistent with the Paris Agreement’s temperature and equity commitments.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{5a285408c11044a888660afbbc6df793,

title = {A factor of two: how the mitigation plans of “climate progressive” nations fall far short of Paris-compliant pathways},

author = {Kevin Anderson and John Broderick and Isak Stoddard},

doi = {10.1080/14693062.2020.1728209},

issn = {1469-3062},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-05-28},

journal = {Climate Policy},

volume = {20},

number = {10},

pages = {1290–1304},

publisher = {Earthscan},

abstract = {The Paris Agreement established an international covenant to reduce emissions in line with holding the increase in temperature to “well below 2°C …and to pursue …1.5°C.” Global modelling studies have repeatedly concluded that such commitments can be delivered through technocratic adjustments to contemporary society, principally price mechanisms driving technical change. However, these models increasingly rely on the huge uptake of highly speculative negative emission technologies (NETs). Moreover, as “developed” nations translate the global challenge into their own targets and policies, scant regard is paid to the language and spirit of equity enshrined in the Paris Agreement. If, instead, the mitigation agenda of “developed country Parties” is determined without reliance on planetary scale NETs and with genuine regard for equity and “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities”, the necessary rates of mitigation increase markedly. This is evident even when considering the UK and Sweden, two nations at the forefront of developing ‘progressive’ climate change legislation and with clear emissions pathways and/or quantitative carbon budgets. In both cases, the carbon budgets underpinning mitigation policy are halved, the immediate mitigation rate is increased to over 10% per annum, and the time to deliver a fully decarbonised energy system is brought forward to 2035-40. Such a challenging mitigation agenda implies profound changes to many facets of industrialised economies. This conclusion is not drawn from political ideology, but rather is a direct consequence of the international community’s obligations under the Paris Agreement and the small and rapidly dwindling global carbon budget.},

note = {Funding Information: The UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC EP/L024756/1) provided funding to KA for the RACER project, and EPSRC for DecarboN8 project under which some of this paper?s analysis was developed. The Swedish Energy Agency (Energimyndigheten) also provided funding through the research project ?Regional carbon budgets and the rapid transition to a fossil-free energy system? (46532-1). We, the authors, thank Jaise Kuriakose and Carly McLachlan (of the Tyndall Centre, University of Manchester) for their frequent and valuable discussions in the development of the paper. We are grateful to Glen Peters (Research Director at ?Cicero, Oslo) and Niclas H?llstr?m (Director, What Next Forum, Sweden) for their ever-helpul insights and guidance. We thank the three anonymous reviewers for their various contributions to tightening and clarifying our text. Finally we are indebted to the journal editor, Joanna Depledge, for her professional support and incisive editing. The views expressed are those of the authors alone. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Copyright: Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ab60ddcf39164c8491376fd9cb94ba30,

title = {Trade and trade-offs: Shipping in changing climates},

author = {Conor Walsh and Nicholas-Joseph Lazarou and Michael Traut and James Price and Carlo Raucci and Maria Sharmina and Paolo Agnolucci and Sarah Mander and Paul Gilbert and Kevin Anderson and Alice Larkin and Tristan Smith},

doi = {10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103537},

issn = {0308-597X},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

journal = {Marine Policy},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {This paper addresses the evolution of maritime transport demand in response to global climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts. The complexity of the global shipping system makes predicting volumes and patterns of long-term future international maritime trade a challenging task which is best explored by building scenarios rather than ‘precise’ forecasts. We present four contrasting scenarios of international maritime trade out to 2050, available in high resolution in terms of the dimensions studied (regions, countries, commodities, decades), which are consistent with high and low levels of global CO2 mitigation and associated climate impacts. The scenarios project trade increasing to between two and four times the 2010 value by 2050. Scenarios characterised by low temperature increases and material intensity lead to the lower bound trade increase with high trade growth in bioenergy commodities. Unfettered production growth across countries, high temperature increases and material intensity lead to a quadrupling of trade across energy, containerised, dry and wet commodities. The estimated range is lower than those in existing scenarios and forecasts in which globalisation is assumed to continue apace. The scenarios which project the highest growth presupposes both limited decarbonisation (in contrast to the Paris Agreement) and continued growth in expanding markets. The scenarios therefore become a valuable policy and decision-making tool to address technological and operational change required of the shipping sector, if it is to deliver mitigation in line with the Paris Agreement.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ab60ddcf39164c8491376fd9cb94ba30b,

title = {Trade and trade-offs: Shipping in changing climates},

author = {Conor Walsh and Nicholas-Joseph Lazarou and Michael Traut and James Price and Carlo Raucci and Maria Sharmina and Paolo Agnolucci and Sarah Mander and Paul Gilbert and Kevin Anderson and Alice Larkin and Tristan Smith},

doi = {10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103537},

issn = {0308-597X},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

journal = {Marine Policy},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {This paper addresses the evolution of maritime transport demand in response to global climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts. The complexity of the global shipping system makes predicting volumes and patterns of long-term future international maritime trade a challenging task which is best explored by building scenarios rather than ‘precise’ forecasts. We present four contrasting scenarios of international maritime trade out to 2050, available in high resolution in terms of the dimensions studied (regions, countries, commodities, decades), which are consistent with high and low levels of global CO2 mitigation and associated climate impacts. The scenarios project trade increasing to between two and four times the 2010 value by 2050. Scenarios characterised by low temperature increases and material intensity lead to the lower bound trade increase with high trade growth in bioenergy commodities. Unfettered production growth across countries, high temperature increases and material intensity lead to a quadrupling of trade across energy, containerised, dry and wet commodities. The estimated range is lower than those in existing scenarios and forecasts in which globalisation is assumed to continue apace. The scenarios which project the highest growth presupposes both limited decarbonisation (in contrast to the Paris Agreement) and continued growth in expanding markets. The scenarios therefore become a valuable policy and decision-making tool to address technological and operational change required of the shipping sector, if it is to deliver mitigation in line with the Paris Agreement.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{2004,

title = {CO2 abatement goals for international shipping},

author = {M Traut and A Larkin and K Anderson and C McGlade and M Sharmina and T Smith},

url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2018.1461059},

doi = {10.1080/14693062.2018.1461059},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Climate Policy},

abstract = {<p>The Paris Agreement, which entered into force in 2016, sets the ambitious climate change mitigation goal of limiting the global temperature increase to below 2textdegreeC and ideally 1.5textdegreeC. This puts a severe constraint on the remaining global GHG emissions budget. While international shipping is also a contributor to anthropogenic GHG emissions, and CO_{2} in particular, it is not included in the Paris Agreement. This article discusses how a share of a global CO_{2} budget over the twenty-first century could be apportioned to international shipping, and, using a range of future trade scenarios, explores the requisite cuts to the CO_{2} intensity of shipping. The results demonstrate that, under a wide range of assumptions, existing short-term levers of efficiency must be urgently exploited to achieve mitigation commensurate with that required from the rest of the economy, with virtually full decarbonization of international shipping required as early as before mid-century.</p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{3d54b8cd4804426fb6fe8ddab869c54f,

title = {CO2 abatement goals for international shipping},

author = {Michael Traut and Alice Larkin and Kevin Anderson and Christophe McGlade and Maria Sharmina and Tristan Smith},

doi = {10.1080/14693062.2018.1461059},

issn = {1469-3062},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Climate Policy},

volume = {18},

number = {8},

pages = {1066–1075},

publisher = {Earthscan},

abstract = {The Paris Agreement, which entered into force in 2016, sets the ambitious climate change mitigation goal of limiting the global temperature increase to below 2°C and ideally 1.5°C. This puts a severe constraint on the remaining global GHG emissions budget. While international shipping is also a contributor to anthropogenic GHG emissions, and CO2 in particular, it is not included in the Paris Agreement. This article discusses how a share of a global CO2 budget over the twenty-first century could be apportioned to international shipping, and, using a range of future trade scenarios, explores the requisite cuts to the CO2 intensity of shipping. The results demonstrate that, under a wide range of assumptions, existing short-term levers of efficiency must be urgently exploited to achieve mitigation commensurate with that required from the rest of the economy, with virtually full decarbonization of international shipping required as early as before mid-century.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{3d54b8cd4804426fb6fe8ddab869c54fb,

title = {CO2 abatement goals for international shipping},

author = {Michael Traut and Alice Larkin and Kevin Anderson and Christophe McGlade and Maria Sharmina and Tristan Smith},

doi = {10.1080/14693062.2018.1461059},

issn = {1469-3062},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-01-01},

journal = {Climate Policy},

volume = {18},

number = {8},

pages = {1066–1075},

publisher = {Earthscan},

abstract = {The Paris Agreement, which entered into force in 2016, sets the ambitious climate change mitigation goal of limiting the global temperature increase to below 2°C and ideally 1.5°C. This puts a severe constraint on the remaining global GHG emissions budget. While international shipping is also a contributor to anthropogenic GHG emissions, and CO2 in particular, it is not included in the Paris Agreement. This article discusses how a share of a global CO2 budget over the twenty-first century could be apportioned to international shipping, and, using a range of future trade scenarios, explores the requisite cuts to the CO2 intensity of shipping. The results demonstrate that, under a wide range of assumptions, existing short-term levers of efficiency must be urgently exploited to achieve mitigation commensurate with that required from the rest of the economy, with virtually full decarbonization of international shipping required as early as before mid-century.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{e12cb7d7475b4659b8270285cf5735ae,

title = {What if negative emission technologies fail at scale? Implications of the Paris Agreement for big emitting nations},

author = {Alice Larkin and Jaise Kuriakose and Maria Sharmina and Kevin Anderson},

doi = {10.1080/14693062.2017.1346498},

issn = {1469-3062},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-08-03},

journal = {Climate Policy},

volume = {18},

number = {6},

pages = {690–714},

publisher = {Earthscan},

abstract = {A cumulative emissions approach is increasingly used to inform mitigation policy. However, there are different interpretations of what ‘2°C’ implies. Here it is argued that cost-optimization models, commonly used to inform policy, typically underplay the urgency of 2°C mitigation. The alignment within many scenarios of optimistic assumptions on negative emissions technologies (NETs), with implausibly early peak emission dates and incremental short-term mitigation, delivers outcomes commensurate with 2°C commitments. In contrast, considering equity and socio-technical barriers to change, suggests a more challenging short-term agenda. To understand these different interpretations, short-term CO2 trends of the largest CO2 emitters, are assessed in relation to a constrained CO2 budget, coupled with a ‘what if’ assumption that negative emissions technologies fail at scale. The outcomes raise profound questions around high-level framings of mitigation policy. The article concludes that applying even weak equity criteria, challenges the feasibility of maintaining a 50% chance of avoiding 2°C without urgent mitigation efforts in the short-term. This highlights a need for greater engagement with: (1) the equity dimension of the Paris Agreement, (2) the sensitivity of constrained carbon budgets to short-term trends and (3) the climate risks for society posed by an almost ubiquitous inclusion of NETs within 2°C scenarios.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{3e8300f84fde4a11a68d641f1d39f154,

title = {The Role of Bio-energy with Carbon Capture and Storage in Meeting the Climate Mitigation Challenge: A Whole System Perspective},

author = {Sarah Mander and Kevin Anderson and Alice Larkin and Clair Gough and Naomi Vaughan},

doi = {10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1739},

issn = {1876-6102},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-07-01},

journal = {Energy Procedia},

volume = {114},

pages = {6036--6043},

publisher = {Elsevier},

abstract = {This paper explores the role and implications of bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) for addressing the climate change mitigation challenge. Framed within the context of the latest emissions budgets, and their associated uncertainty, we present a summary of the contribution of BECCS within the Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) scenarios used by the climate change community. Within this discussion we seek to shed light on two important areas. Firstly, that BECCS is a central, but often hidden element of many of the modelling work that underpins climate policy from the global to the national scale. The second area we address are the assumptions for BECCS embedded within IAM models, and the wider system consequences of these implied levels of deployment. In light of these challenges, we question whether BECCS can deliver what is anticipated of it within existing climate change policy.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1940,

title = {What if negative emission technologies fail at scale? Implications of the Paris Agreement for big emitting nations},

author = {Alice Larkin and Jaise Kuriakose and Kevin Anderson and Maria Sharmina},

url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1346498},

doi = {10.1080/14693062.2017.1346498},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

journal = {Climate Policy},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{939b781c7b2b4974be3ca3e04997c70c,

title = {The trouble with negative emissions},

author = {Kevin Anderson and Glen Peters},

doi = {10.1126/science.aah4567},

issn = {0036-8075},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-10-14},

journal = {Science},

volume = {354},

number = {3609},

pages = {182–183},

publisher = {American Association for the Advancement of Science (A A A S)},

abstract = {In December 2015, member states of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) adopted the Paris Agreement, which aims to hold the increase in the global average temperature to below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C. The Paris Agreement requires that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission sources and sinks are balanced by the second half of this century. Because some nonzero sources are unavoidable, this leads to the abstract concept of “negative emissions,” the removal of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere through technical means. The Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) informing policy-makers assume the large-scale use of negative-emission technologies. If we rely on these and they are not deployed or are unsuccessful at removing CO2 from the atmosphere at the levels assumed, society will be locked into a high-temperature pathway.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{939b781c7b2b4974be3ca3e04997c70cb,

title = {The trouble with negative emissions},

author = {Kevin Anderson and Glen Peters},

doi = {10.1126/science.aah4567},

issn = {0036-8075},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-10-14},

journal = {Science},

volume = {354},

number = {3609},

pages = {182–183},

publisher = {American Association for the Advancement of Science (A A A S)},

abstract = {In December 2015, member states of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) adopted the Paris Agreement, which aims to hold the increase in the global average temperature to below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C. The Paris Agreement requires that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission sources and sinks are balanced by the second half of this century. Because some nonzero sources are unavoidable, this leads to the abstract concept of “negative emissions,” the removal of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere through technical means. The Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) informing policy-makers assume the large-scale use of negative-emission technologies. If we rely on these and they are not deployed or are unsuccessful at removing CO2 from the atmosphere at the levels assumed, society will be locked into a high-temperature pathway.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1586,

title = {The trouble with negative emissions},

author = {K Anderson and G Peters},

url = {http://science.sciencemag.org/content/354/6309/182/tab-pdf},

doi = {10.1126/science.aah4567},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-10-01},

journal = {Science},

volume = {354},

pages = {182-183},

chapter = {182},

abstract = {<p>In December 2015, member states of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) adopted the Paris Agreement, which aims to hold the increase in the global average temperature to below 2textdegreeC and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5textdegreeC. The Paris Agreement requires that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission sources and sinks are balanced by the second half of this century. Because some nonzero sources are unavoidable, this leads to the abstract concept of textquotedblleftnegative emissions,textquotedblright the removal of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) from the atmosphere through technical means. The Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) informing policy-makers assume the large-scale use of negative-emission technologies. If we rely on these and they are not deployed or are unsuccessful at removing CO2 from the atmosphere at the levels assumed, society will be locked into a high-temperature pathway</p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{d0bc9fce4d434bb081c6dcb3019e82b9,

title = {Planting Seeds So Something Bigger Might Emerge: The Paris Agreement and the Fight Against Climate Change},

author = {Kevin Anderson and Joseph Nevins},

doi = {10.1080/08854300.2016.1183992},

issn = {0885-4300},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-07-13},

journal = {Socialism and Democracy},

volume = {30},

number = {2},

pages = {209–218},

publisher = {Routledge},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{d0bc9fce4d434bb081c6dcb3019e82b9b,

title = {Planting Seeds So Something Bigger Might Emerge: The Paris Agreement and the Fight Against Climate Change},

author = {Kevin Anderson and Joseph Nevins},

doi = {10.1080/08854300.2016.1183992},

issn = {0885-4300},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-07-13},

journal = {Socialism and Democracy},

volume = {30},

number = {2},

pages = {209–218},

publisher = {Routledge},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1234,

title = {A nexus perspective on competing land demands: Wider lessons from a UK policy case study},

author = {M Sharmina and C Hoolohan and Alice Larkin and PJ. Burgess and J Colwill and P Gilbert and D Howard and J Knox and K Anderson},

url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901116300326},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

journal = {Environmental Science & Policy},

volume = {59},

pages = {74-84},

chapter = {74},

abstract = {<p><span>As nations develop policies for low-carbon transitions, conflicts with existing policies and planning tools are leading to competing demands for land and other resources. This raises fundamental questions over how multiple demands can best be managed. Taking the UK as an empirical example, this paper critiques current policies and practices to explore the interdependencies at the water-energy-food nexus. It considers how current land uses and related policies affect the UKtextquoterights resilience to climate change, setting out an agenda for research and practice relevant to stakeholders in land-use management, policy and modelling. Despite recent progress in recognising such nexus challenges, most UK land-related policies and associated science continue to be compartmentalised by both scale and sector and seldom acknowledge nexus interconnections. On a temporal level, the absence of an over-arching strategy leaves inter-generational trade-offs poorly considered. Given the system lock-in and the lengthy policy-making process, it is essential to develop alternative ways of providing dynamic, flexible, practical and scientifically robust decision support for policy-makers. A range of ecosystem services need to be valued and integrated into a resilient land-use strategy, including the introduction of non-monetary, physical-unit constraints on the use of particular services.</span></p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{1698,

title = {The promise of negative emissions Response},

author = {Kevin Anderson and Glen Peters},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

abstract = {<p>Data from the 2016 edition of <a title="View impact factors and immediacy indexes for journals" href="javascript:;">\underline{Journal Citation Reportstextregistered }</a><br>Publisher AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE, 1200 NEW YORK AVE, NW, WASHINGTON, DC 20005 USA<br>ISSN: 0036-8075<br>eISSN: 1095-9203<br>SCIENCE   Volume: 354   Issue: 6313   Pages: 714-715   Published: NOV 11 2016</p>},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{b4ae9a92dfd54ba3b8d1eba280e070ee,

title = {The NuMI neutrino beam},

author = {P. Adamson and K. Anderson and M. Andrews and R. Andrews and I. Anghel and D. Augustine and A. Aurisano and S. Avvakumov and D. S. Ayres and B. Baller and B. Barish and G. Barr and W. L. Barrett and R. H. Bernstein and J. Biggs and M. Bishai and A. Blake and V. Bocean and G. J. Bock and D. J. Boehnlein and D. Bogert and K. Bourkland and S. V. Cao and C. M. Castromonte and S. Childress and B. C. Choudhary and J. A. B. Coelho and J. H. Cobb and L. Corwin and D. Crane and J. P. Cravens and D. Cronin-Hennessy and R. J. Ducar and J. K. De Jong and A. V. Devan and N. E. Devenish and M. V. Diwan and A. R. Erwin and C. O. Escobar and E. Falk and G. J. Feldman and T. H. Fields and R. Ford and M. V. Frohne and H. R. Gallagher and V. Garkusha and R. A. Gomes and M. C. Goodman and P. Gouffon and N. Graf and R. Gran and N. Grossman and K. Grzelak and A. Habig and S. R. Hahn and D. Harding and D. Harris and P. G. Harris and J. Hartnell and R. Hatcher and S. Hays and K. Heller and A. Holin and J. Huang and J. Hylen and A. Ibrahim and D. Indurthy and G. M. Irwin and Z. Isvan and D. E. Jaffe and C. James and D. Jensen and J. Johnstone and T. Kafka and S. M. S. Kasahara and G. Koizumi and S. Kopp and M. Kordosky and A. Kreymer and K. Lang and C. Laughton and G. Lefeuvre and J. Ling and P. J. Litchfield and L. Loiacono and P. Lucas and W. A. Mann and A. Marchionni and M. L. Marshak and N. Mayer and C. McGivern and M. M. Medeiros and R. Mehdiyev and J. R. Meier and M. D. Messier and D. G. Michael and R. H. Milburn and J. L. Miller and W. H. Miller and S. R. Mishra and S. Moed Sher and C. D. Moore and J. Morfín and L. Mualem and S. Mufson and S. Murgia and M. Murtagh and J. Musser and D. Naples and J. K. Nelson and H. B. Newman and R. J. Nichol and J. A. Nowak and J. O'Connor and W. P. Oliver and M. Olsen and M. Orchanian and S. Osprey and R. B. Pahlka and J. Paley and A. Para and R. B. Patterson and T. Patzak and Z. Pavlović and G. Pawloski and A. Perch and E. A. Peterson and D. A. Petyt and M. M. Pfützner and S. Phan-Budd and R. K. Plunkett and N. Poonthottathil and P. Prieto and D. Pushka and X. Qiu and A. Radovic and R. A. Rameika and J. Ratchford and B. Rebel and R. Reilly and C. Rosenfeld and H. A. Rubin and K. Ruddick and M. C. Sanchez and N. Saoulidou and L. Sauer and J. Schneps and D. Schoo and A. Schreckenberger and P. Schreiner and P. Shanahan and R. Sharma and W. Smart and C. Smith and A. Sousa and A. Stefanik and N. Tagg and R. L. Talaga and G. Tassotto and J. Thomas and J. Thompson and M. A. Thomson and X. Tian and A. Timmons and D. Tinsley and S. C. Tognini and R. Toner and D. Torretta and I. Trostin and G. Tzanakos and J. Urheim and P. Vahle and K. Vaziri and E. Villegas and B. Viren and G. Vogel and R. C. Webber and A. Weber and R. C. Webb and A. Wehmann and C. White and L. H. Whitehead and L. H. Whitehead and S. G. Wojcicki and M. L. Wong-Squires and T. Yang and F. X. Yumiceva and V. Zarucheisky and R. Zwaska},

doi = {10.1016/j.nima.2015.08.063},

issn = {0168-9002},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

journal = {Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment},

volume = {806},

pages = {279–306},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {This paper describes the hardware and operations of the Neutrinos at the Main Injector (NuMI) beam at Fermilab. It elaborates on the design considerations for the beam as a whole and for individual elements. The most important design details of individual components are described. Beam monitoring systems and procedures, including the tuning and alignment of the beam and NuMI long-term performance, are also discussed.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{b4ae9a92dfd54ba3b8d1eba280e070eeb,

title = {The NuMI neutrino beam},

author = {P. Adamson and K. Anderson and M. Andrews and R. Andrews and I. Anghel and D. Augustine and A. Aurisano and S. Avvakumov and D. S. Ayres and B. Baller and B. Barish and G. Barr and W. L. Barrett and R. H. Bernstein and J. Biggs and M. Bishai and A. Blake and V. Bocean and G. J. Bock and D. J. Boehnlein and D. Bogert and K. Bourkland and S. V. Cao and C. M. Castromonte and S. Childress and B. C. Choudhary and J. A. B. Coelho and J. H. Cobb and L. Corwin and D. Crane and J. P. Cravens and D. Cronin-Hennessy and R. J. Ducar and J. K. De Jong and A. V. Devan and N. E. Devenish and M. V. Diwan and A. R. Erwin and C. O. Escobar and E. Falk and G. J. Feldman and T. H. Fields and R. Ford and M. V. Frohne and H. R. Gallagher and V. Garkusha and R. A. Gomes and M. C. Goodman and P. Gouffon and N. Graf and R. Gran and N. Grossman and K. Grzelak and A. Habig and S. R. Hahn and D. Harding and D. Harris and P. G. Harris and J. Hartnell and R. Hatcher and S. Hays and K. Heller and A. Holin and J. Huang and J. Hylen and A. Ibrahim and D. Indurthy and G. M. Irwin and Z. Isvan and D. E. Jaffe and C. James and D. Jensen and J. Johnstone and T. Kafka and S. M. S. Kasahara and G. Koizumi and S. Kopp and M. Kordosky and A. Kreymer and K. Lang and C. Laughton and G. Lefeuvre and J. Ling and P. J. Litchfield and L. Loiacono and P. Lucas and W. A. Mann and A. Marchionni and M. L. Marshak and N. Mayer and C. McGivern and M. M. Medeiros and R. Mehdiyev and J. R. Meier and M. D. Messier and D. G. Michael and R. H. Milburn and J. L. Miller and W. H. Miller and S. R. Mishra and S. Moed Sher and C. D. Moore and J. Morfín and L. Mualem and S. Mufson and S. Murgia and M. Murtagh and J. Musser and D. Naples and J. K. Nelson and H. B. Newman and R. J. Nichol and J. A. Nowak and J. O'Connor and W. P. Oliver and M. Olsen and M. Orchanian and S. Osprey and R. B. Pahlka and J. Paley and A. Para and R. B. Patterson and T. Patzak and Z. Pavlović and G. Pawloski and A. Perch and E. A. Peterson and D. A. Petyt and M. M. Pfützner and S. Phan-Budd and R. K. Plunkett and N. Poonthottathil and P. Prieto and D. Pushka and X. Qiu and A. Radovic and R. A. Rameika and J. Ratchford and B. Rebel and R. Reilly and C. Rosenfeld and H. A. Rubin and K. Ruddick and M. C. Sanchez and N. Saoulidou and L. Sauer and J. Schneps and D. Schoo and A. Schreckenberger and P. Schreiner and P. Shanahan and R. Sharma and W. Smart and C. Smith and A. Sousa and A. Stefanik and N. Tagg and R. L. Talaga and G. Tassotto and J. Thomas and J. Thompson and M. A. Thomson and X. Tian and A. Timmons and D. Tinsley and S. C. Tognini and R. Toner and D. Torretta and I. Trostin and G. Tzanakos and J. Urheim and P. Vahle and K. Vaziri and E. Villegas and B. Viren and G. Vogel and R. C. Webber and A. Weber and R. C. Webb and A. Wehmann and C. White and L. H. Whitehead and L. H. Whitehead and S. G. Wojcicki and M. L. Wong-Squires and T. Yang and F. X. Yumiceva and V. Zarucheisky and R. Zwaska},

doi = {10.1016/j.nima.2015.08.063},

issn = {0168-9002},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

journal = {Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research, Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment},

volume = {806},

pages = {279–306},

publisher = {Elsevier BV},

abstract = {This paper describes the hardware and operations of the Neutrinos at the Main Injector (NuMI) beam at Fermilab. It elaborates on the design considerations for the beam as a whole and for individual elements. The most important design details of individual components are described. Beam monitoring systems and procedures, including the tuning and alignment of the beam and NuMI long-term performance, are also discussed.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{28788170ce874bf7adee81ce32ebac24,

title = {Talks in the city of light generate more heat},

author = {Kevin Anderson},

doi = {10.1038/528437a},

issn = {0028-0836},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-21},

journal = {Nature},

volume = {528},

publisher = {Springer Nature},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{28788170ce874bf7adee81ce32ebac24b,

title = {Talks in the city of light generate more heat},

author = {Kevin Anderson},

doi = {10.1038/528437a},

issn = {0028-0836},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-21},

journal = {Nature},

volume = {528},

publisher = {Springer Nature},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ecef11e8a221474cb6bc767c2cf97ea6,

title = {Russia's cumulative carbon budgets for a global 2°C target},

author = {Maria Sharmina and Alice Bows-Larkin and Kevin Anderson},

doi = {10.1080/17583004.2015.1113616},

issn = {1758-3004},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-11-30},

journal = {Carbon Management},

publisher = {Future Science Ltd},

abstract = {Russia is the fifth highest emitter of carbon dioxide, and has been in the top five for at least six decades. However, thus far no in-depth study has estimated Russia's cumulative emissions in the context of the global 2°C constraint. This is despite the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reiterating the importance of cumulative emissions and their approximately linear correlation with temperature rises. Translating the global 2°C temperature commitment into a meaningful national context, this paper derives and evaluates 2°C-compatible carbon budgets for Russia, based on a range of apportionment regimes. The work contributes to the debate by providing a deeper analysis of the principles of allocating carbon emissions to Russia, while considering two probabilities for remaining within 2°C. This analysis demonstrates how, if Russia is to make a fair contribution to global emission reductions in line with 2°C, its 2011-2100 cumulative emissions should not exceed 20-26 GtCO2, commensurate with a 37-52% probability of exceeding the global 2°C commitment. If Russia continues to emit CO2 at current annual levels, this budget will be 'spent' by the mid-2020s. Yet, the carbon budget estimated here for Russia appears technically feasible, if extremely challenging. Despite continuing to assert itself as a fossil fuel superpower, Russia has a wealth of opportunities for full and early decarbonisation, including the potential to become a net exporter of renewable energy.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ecef11e8a221474cb6bc767c2cf97ea6b,

title = {Russia's cumulative carbon budgets for a global 2°C target},

author = {Maria Sharmina and Alice Bows-Larkin and Kevin Anderson},

doi = {10.1080/17583004.2015.1113616},

issn = {1758-3004},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-11-30},

journal = {Carbon Management},

publisher = {Future Science Ltd},

abstract = {Russia is the fifth highest emitter of carbon dioxide, and has been in the top five for at least six decades. However, thus far no in-depth study has estimated Russia's cumulative emissions in the context of the global 2°C constraint. This is despite the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reiterating the importance of cumulative emissions and their approximately linear correlation with temperature rises. Translating the global 2°C temperature commitment into a meaningful national context, this paper derives and evaluates 2°C-compatible carbon budgets for Russia, based on a range of apportionment regimes. The work contributes to the debate by providing a deeper analysis of the principles of allocating carbon emissions to Russia, while considering two probabilities for remaining within 2°C. This analysis demonstrates how, if Russia is to make a fair contribution to global emission reductions in line with 2°C, its 2011-2100 cumulative emissions should not exceed 20-26 GtCO2, commensurate with a 37-52% probability of exceeding the global 2°C commitment. If Russia continues to emit CO2 at current annual levels, this budget will be 'spent' by the mid-2020s. Yet, the carbon budget estimated here for Russia appears technically feasible, if extremely challenging. Despite continuing to assert itself as a fossil fuel superpower, Russia has a wealth of opportunities for full and early decarbonisation, including the potential to become a net exporter of renewable energy.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{533008e184174308ab071e32945eefc8,

title = {Duality in climate science},

author = {Kevin Anderson},

doi = {10.1038/ngeo2559},

issn = {1752-0894},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-10-12},

journal = {Nature Geoscience},

publisher = {Springer Nature},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{533008e184174308ab071e32945eefc8b,

title = {Duality in climate science},

author = {Kevin Anderson},

doi = {10.1038/ngeo2559},

issn = {1752-0894},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-10-12},

journal = {Nature Geoscience},

publisher = {Springer Nature},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}